Opinion
Civil Action CUMSC-CV-18-0377
07-28-2020
MARK KLEIN, Plaintiff v. JESSICA DEMERS-KLEIN now known as Jessica Demers, and AMANDA MYERS, Defendants
Plaintiff-Thomas Hallett, Esq. Defendant: Demers Klein-Elizabeth Germani, Esq. Defendant Myers-Theodore Irwin, Esq.
Plaintiff-Thomas Hallett, Esq.
Defendant: Demers Klein-Elizabeth Germani, Esq.
Defendant Myers-Theodore Irwin, Esq.
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL ATTORNEY FEES
A. M. Horton, Justice
Defendant Amanda Myers's Application for Attorney Fees After Appeal and Defendant Jessica Demers's Motion for Award of Attorney Fees fire before the court, along with Plaintiff Mark Klein's memoranda in opposition to the motions and the Defendants' reply memoranda. The court elects to decide the motions without oral argument. See M.R. Civ. P. 7(b)(7).
As the assigned single justice while the case was pending In Superior Court, I have been asked to decide the pending motions.
The Defendants' motions are brought under the anti-SLAPP statute, 14 M.R.S. § 556, which permits but does not require the court to award attorney fees to the prevailing party. See id. ("If the court grants a special motion to dismiss, the court may award the moving party costs and reasonable attorney's fees, Including those incurred for the special motion and any related discovery matters.") The Defendants clearly prevailed, the Superior Court having granted their special motions to dismiss and the Law Court having summarily affirmed the dismissal. See Klein v. Myers, Me. Supr. Jud. Ct, Docket No. CUM-19-258 (mem. dec. March 3, 2020).
The Defendants' motions seek awards of their attorney fees and costs incurred in opposing Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration of the Superior Court's April 17, 2019 dismissal order, and in opposing the Plaintiffs appeal of that Order and the Superior Court's August 13, 2019 Order awarding attorney fees and costs to the Defendants. The amounts requested by Defendants in their pending motions for additional awards are amply supported and documented in fee affidavits and records, and are reasonable and appropriate under the applicable factors. See Poussard v. Commercial Credit Plan, Inc., 479 A.2d 881, 885 (Me. 1984).
Plaintiff Klein does not challenge any specific component of the fees and costs claimed. Instead, his opposition presents several blanket objections, none of which is substantiated, . In its August 13, 2019 Order making an initial award of fees, the court spelled out in detail the reasons why the fee award was justified. All of those reasons apply as well to the Defendants' motions for additional fees. For all of those reasons, Plaintiff Klein's decision to bring the underlying case was ill-advised and his decision to appeal the dismissal of the case even more so
It is hereby ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Defendant Amanda Myers's Application for Attorney Fees After Appeal is hereby granted. Defendant Amanda Myers is hereby awarded $21, 365.57 in attorney fees and costs against Plaintiff Mark Klein. Plaintiff shall make payment in full within 30 days of when the judgment becomes final.
2. Defendant Jessica Demers's Motion for Award of Attorney Fees is hereby granted. Defendant Jessica Demers is hereby awarded $23, 954 in attorney fees and costs against Plaintiff Mark Klein. Plaintiff shall make payment in full within SO days of when the judgment becomes final.
3. The foregoing awards are in addition to the amounts awarded to the Defendants in the court's August 13, 2019 Order, Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 79(a), the Clerk is hereby directed to incorporate this Order by reference in the docket.